Here’s a question for you: what’s the plural of fish?
English is a pretty convoluted language. Even when things seem straightforward, exceptions pop up to turn regular rules upside down.
Today we'll look closely at the word “fish,” and more importantly, the correct plural use of it.
Whether you're writing a rhyming children's book like One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish or a literary novel staged on the sea, understanding the proper use of this word—like all good grammar—can strengthen your writing.
Learn good grammar without depending on tools like Grammarly with bite-sized posts on simple grammar rules like this one.
Normal Pluralization
In general, English pluralization rules are pretty simple: just add an “s.”
My friends and I walked our dogs to the pond, where we saw a few turtles and many fish.
Friend, dog, and turtle all become friends, dogs, and turtles.
And then there’s fish.
The Plural of Fish
An individual fish is just that—a fish. One scaly animal swimming in the sea (or river, or pond, or fishbowl).
Here’s the thing: if you have two scaly animals swimming in your fishbowl, you have two fish. No matter how many fish you have, the word “fish” doesn’t change.
It doesn't matter whether you're talking about a school of fish or the number of fish in that school. The plural form of the word fish is fish.
Its plural form is the same as the singular—most of the time. I say most of the time because this rule sometimes broken and more regular plural forms are also used for some of these words.
The plural for fish isn’t the only case in the English language where the singular and plural nouns are the same word. The plural of moose, for example, is moose. The plural of deer is deer. The plural of sheep is sheep.
Why, then, do we sometimes hear the word “fishes”?
Fish vs. Fishes
Unlike “sheeps” or “mooses,” the word “fishes” is a real, grammatically correct English word. In fact, Merriam-Webster lists both “fish” and “fishes” as plural forms of “fish.”
“Fishes” doesn’t generally come into play in regular conversation, but it’s a helpful term in biology, especially for ichthyologists, the scientists who study fish.
Remember that example from above of the fish in the pond? In general, we’d say we saw fish.
Maybe, though, we saw multiple species of fish. Imagine you're looking at multiple freshwater fishes—some bass, some carp, and some minnows—and want to refer to them as a collective whole. In this case, we could say we saw fishes, because there are several types of fish.
Say it again: you can use the word “fishes” when referring to different kinds of fish.
Fishes: Plural vs. Possessive
There’s one more reason you might hear the word “fishes” tossed around: when it’s used in the possessive form.
To indicate one fish has something, we add an “’s” to the end. For example:
I have one goldfish in a bowl. My fish’s eyes are big.
Note the apostrophe here. It comes before the s because there's just one singular fish.
To indicate that multiple fish have something, though, we have to pull out the “fishes” again:
Sarah has three goldfish in a bowl. Her fishes’ eyes are even bigger.
In this case, we use “fishes’” no matter how many different species of fish there are. The apostrophe comes after the s because there are multiple fish and they all possess something (in this case, even bigger eyes than my fish's eyes).
Fishy Rules of Pluralization
Throughout the history of the English language, we’ve pulled in words from all kinds of different sources and integrated them into regular language. For the most part, we’ve been okay about standardizing things—generally, to make something plural, all you have to do is add an “s” to the end.
Sometimes, though, we mix it up with convoluted exceptions, and then we end up with “moose,” “sheep,” and . . . “fishes.”
What can I say? English grammar is a fishy business.
Have “fish” and “fishes” ever tripped you up? What other convoluted English grammar irregularities do you find interesting? Let me know in the comments.
PRACTICE
Two characters are going scuba diving. One is familiar with the correct use of “fish” vs. “fishes,” and the other has never seen a fish in their life. Write their story for fifteen minutes. When you’re done, share your writing in the comments, and remember to leave feedback for your fellow writers!
This one made me laugh! What a wonderfully strange language we have. Thanks for clearing up the fish mystery.
I’m so glad to hear it! You’re very welcome. 🙂
This is the kind of thing that makes me really glad to be a native speaker. I have no idea how second language writers manage it.
Second language writers get translators or copy editors. I hear them speak (Spanish-speakers are common where I live), and things DO get whirly. But I know what they mean, and that, after all, is the purpose of language.
As a French native speaker writing in English, I’d say that on the contrary, these kind of rules are easier for me to remember, because I’ve not learned to speak English by ear when I was a child, so I don’t get confused between different similar-sounding words. For example, I’d never confuse it’s/its, or there/their/they’re (I’m always surprised when I see the number of posts on the internet dedicated to these topics), because I’ve learned these words and their function at the same time. I have other difficulties when I write in English, but not these. And believe me, French is much worse when it comes to fishy grammar and exceptions!
I wholeheartedly agree! We certainly haven’t made English easy on them.
What!? Then this is wrong!?
Down in the meadow in a
little bitty pool
Swam three little fishies
and a mamma fishies too
“Swim,” said da’ mamma fishie,
“swim if you can.”
And dey swam and dey swam all over da dam.
Or is this a case of a fish as a third person narrator?
Joy to the fishes in the deep blue sea….
Joy to you and me…
Nope, wrong song. Here ya go … but maybe you had to be born in the forties to remember it 🙂
Boop boop diten datem whatem choo
Boop boop diten datem whatem choo
Boop boop diten datem whatem choo
And dey swam and dey swam
right over da dam
Haha! The song I heard it from was definitely not about fishes, however I do recollect hearing those lyrics of yours sometime in my life.
As someone native to the sixties, I do, rather alarmingly, find this familiar.
Thanks for the smile, Gary G Little!
We are all capable of poking fun at this…that means we understand it, know it, but don’t take it too serious. After all, I am not writing a scholarly piece.
I’m not sure about “a momma fishies too” part.
I think if we’re going to use “bitty,” “fishie,” and “dey,” a plural “fishies” can be forgiven. Although I too think “a mama fishies too” is a bit of a stretch.
That said, I love the idea of a fish as a third person narrator!
If you’ve been keeping up with my practices (Practice? Practi?), you probably know I am studying Japanese. Most nouns in Japanese are “moose” or “sheep,” in that the singular and the plural are the same.
One thing I’ve learned is how insane plurals in English are! Fish vs. fishes is just the tip of the iceberg! The plural of house is houses. The plural of mouse is mice. The plural of moose is (as noted in the article) still moose, but the plural of child is children. (?) The plural of woman is women, producing a short “i” sound that is not evident in the spelling. One begins to think there is no rule at all for forming plurals in English, merely conventions.
That’s all of my thoughts on plurals for now. Sorry not to write from the practice prompt, but I know next to nothing about scuba diving and, having no plans to include scuba diving in any of my works, I don’t have the motivation to research it right now. I also have trouble imagining a diver who has never seen a fish. Is this an alien or something? Hmmm…
I like you humour in the two sentences, Bruce.
As for me, thank heavens that English is my mother tongue. although I’m not a Brit. Look at all those who must study it, per force. I love the English language.
“merely conventions” yes, I would say merely inventions. And as you will see from my practi, this WAS indeed an alien, kind of a Stranger in a Strange Pond deal.
You’re absolutely right about all the crazy plurals. For the most part, that points to all the ways in which English has
borrowedstolen vocabulary and grammar from other languages.My personal favorite is “children”: “child” comes from the Old English “cild.” Originally, the plural of “cild” was “cild” (fish and fish, anyone?). In the late 10th century the plural “cildru” appeared, and then in the late 12th century, “cildru” was re-pluraled with an “-en” to produce “children.” So “children” is actually a double plural. You can read more here and here if you’re as fascinated by this strange etymology as I am.
*mind explodes* this is truly what I have been searching for
Haha, I’m so glad! 😀
But wait – there’s at least one more reason you might hear the word “fishes” tossed around: when it’s used as a verb. He fishes around for the dagger when Joan turns her back.
You’re right! I was so focused on every way it could appear as a noun that I forgot its entirely correct (and much more common) verb form. Thanks for pointing that out!
Seriously, just yesterday, I was attempting to craft a sentence with the plural possessive of ‘it.’ Haha.
We splashed backward into the water. I didn’t know what he wanted from this trip, maybe immersion in a new medium. Me? I felt excitement in my belly, knowing that no matter how little I knew about fish, it would be more than he knew.
Ah, signs of life. I used my communicator.
“Did you see the fish?” I said.
“That was a fish?” he said.
“Yes; look, there’s another one. Two fish. And there’s another type of fish. Now we have three fish, and two fishes..”
He was silent, looking in slow motion from one fish to another. His gloved hand was raised, fingers splayed. He shook his head.
“Sounds like five, and I only see three,” he said.
“Something is fishy here, I think,” I said. “Are you okay?”
The fishes moved away. One fish’s tailfin swayed gently, propelling it out of reach. The other fishes’ sleek bodies seemed not to undulate at all, though they also moved out of range.
“Wait, come back, Fishy! Here, fishies, come here….Fishies gone.”
I saw his furrowed brow inside his mask. I watched him watch them disappear. I thought, Thank goodness this was a conversation, and didn’t need to be written anywhere.
What did you land on for the plural possessive of “it”? “Their,” or something else? You’ve got me curious!
This is a fun little scene. I love the line, “Now we have three fish, and two fishes…” It leaves some great ambiguity—is he being a kindly guide, or deliberately confusing? Thanks for sharing!
Oh, just saw this, sorry! Plural possessive of ‘it’ would be its’ if there were a sentence to use it in. Because of confusion, it really isn’t used that way. Who ever heard of a bunch of its running around? The plural is ridiculous, so best just name what ‘it’ is, and use the plural possessive of that. My brain turned to oatmeal trying to craft the sentence!!
I think you are just fishing for things here.
Good reason to watch neither, eh? By the by, Jesse Leigh, been to your website. You have the voice of an angel!
As a marine naturalist, yes, I’ve seen a fish in the bucket and many fishes in the net. I’ve yelled, “GET THE FISH OUT OF THE NET!”, referring to all of different kinds of fish and many organisms that are not fish: shellfish (arthropods and molluscs like shrimp, crabs, snails, and horseshoe crabs, which technically aren’t even crabs), sea jellies (commonly called “jellyfish”, but aren’t fish at all either), and, while we’re at it, seastars, ’cause there ain’t no way they’re fish. Equally, we feed the fish in the aquarium, aquariums, and/or aquaria (but that’s a whole other kettle of … ). I’ve read “Fishes of the Gulf of Maine”. It was very good, but kinda dry. And I’ve seen “Finding Nemo” in which they nailed those fishy personalities to a T. I love the smell of fish. I love the taste of fish. I love to feel fish. I love to see fish. I love to hear fish (yes, little fishies make little fishy noises – so do big ones, BTW). And, no, none of this seems odd to me at all. Although my friend’s son used to call them bishes. :/ and I’m sure one or two of my friends find it all quite fishy indeed.
……..•´¯`•..•´¯`•..>…..•´¯`•..•´¯`•..>… ..•´¯`•..•´¯`•..>…
You make a great point—although we COULD say “fishes” when referring to many species of fish, if you’re yelling to get them out of the net, “fish” comes to mind a lot faster and gets the point across just as well. I love your deep appreciation for fish. I can’t say I love the smell of fish, but I’m glad someone does!
I need help. how do i explain to a kid why Fish starts with F and Ph starts Photograph.
I tell you, I love this language, but I have a bone to pick with its grammar! Great article.
I agree—much as I love the English language, I have to say we’ve often tossed logic out the window!
Ha great post. I just had this discussion with my five year old. Trying to explain “fish” and “deer” is difficult. He also asked what is the plural of “Bigfoot.” Bigfeet?
Oh man, I can only imagine! You’ve got me stumped with “Bigfoot.” Bigfoots? Bigfeet? Or many Bigfoot, like many moose?
Should I drop a line and test the waters here by raising the idea of fish swimming the waters off Fukushima?
Would there not be many fission fishes that are best not fished?
Okay, I am trawling for puns here, but it has me hooked.
All right, I’ll take the bait—these are some great puns!
ABCD goldfish.
MNO goldfish!
SDR goldfish!
RDR goldfish!
Tom ‘fishes’ in the lake every day, and, at times, he catches a lot of ‘fish’. Why not stick to the simple rule that ‘fish’ (the common noun) has no plural. Same with hair, deer, money.